pedantic when writing to the factor. thanks for watching us tonight. please, always remember that the spin stops right here because we are definitely looking out for you. >> sean: welcome to hafnlt today was supposed to be the day that critical questions were finally answered about the benghazi terror attack. top administration officials appeared on coop tol hill -- capitol hill to testify. but we are learning that it was more of the same from team obama, questions that went unanswered, finger-pointing and thanks to the least transparent white house in history, it appears the widespread coverup continues. hear directly from two congressmen who were in the room to hear the testimony of the director of national

intelligence, james clapper, and the acting cia director, michael morel. the major flashpoint came when administration officials were pressed on the so-called benghazi talking points. in other words, who was responsible for creating the false narrative that the attack was the result of a youtube video. and who sent ambassador rice on five separate sunday shows to tell the world to rest easy because al qaeda was not responsible. sadly, our sources have told us that neither person provided answers to the important, critical questions, so republicans are now demanning that a select committee be formed to investigate this matter. one was formed to look into watergate, but unlike watergate, this scandal cost lives. four brave americans are dead and a united states ambassador was assass nail theed for the first time in more than 30 years. that's apparently not enough to capture the attention of this president. he is busy with far more

important matters. do you know what he just finished doing a short time ago at the white house? according to his official schedule, he just hosted a v.i.p. private viewing of the new movie "lincoln," which by the way, you paid for. mr. president, i hope you were taking notes and learned a thing or two about honesty and integrity while you were watching it because while you sat in your private theater with your popcorn, the family members of the benghazi victims are at home, waiting for you to finally come clean about what really happened on that fateful day. in other words, what did you know? when did you know it? joining me with the developing story, two men in the room for the closed hearing. peter king and joe heck. gentlemen, welcome back to "hannity." >> good to be with you? >> congressman, let's start with you. take us in the room. what did you learn today? >> want all we wanted to learn, specifically, sean, you mentioned the talking points. the intelligence community was

asked, said that when they prepared the talking points, they had language in there saying that al qaeda affiliated groups were directly involved in the attack. when the talk points left the intelligence community and went somewhere -- thy couldn't tell us where, but they did admit one of the places was the white house. when the talking points came back, that language was taken out and it said there was an indication that extremist groups might be involved. so someone deliberately watered down the talking points. so when the president says that susan rice was giving out -- talking about the most updated and the fully documented intelligence that the intelligence community had, that's not true because there were a number of analysis that had been done in the three days leading up to the talking points, which clearly showed by the intelligence community's own analysis that al qaeda-affiliated groups were directly involved. this is a total -- sham. >> sean: we need to findoud who took them out.

i mean -- >> here we have the leaders in the american intelligence community saying khalid al-sayah they don't know who altered their talking points. if we can't find out who in the administration altered the talking points, how are we going to find out what the enemy's doing. >> sean: congressman heck, the realtime video. from what i understand, there were two sets of video, one from the drone above, which got there 15 minutes after it started or thereabouts. and video from the compound itself. can you describe what was on the video, sir? >> well, the video that was obtained from the unmanned aerial vehicle showed what was going on on the ground. from a distance and grainy and difficult to decipher, but shows the ongoing attack and the buildings burning and a potential road block, not far from the compound. the question we posed was who saw that video and when? likewise, like they couldn't answer the question about the talking points, they couldn't answer who from the national

security authority, whether it was the president or the secretary of defense or anybody else from the national security council, whether or not they were watching that live as our consulate was under attack with a missing u.s. ambassador. that's a question that needs to be answered. why wasn't those officials looking at that video when it was spontaneously available. >> sean: one of the things i learned in this, congressman king, i went through the department of defense and their timeline. this started on september 11, 3:42 eastern time. by 5:00, secretary panetta and general dempsey attended a previously scheduled meeting with the president at the white house approximate the d.o.d. is saying that the leaders discussed potential responses to the emerging situation. we have not known what the president knew, when he knew it about all of this. did you get any clar identification on the timeline in regards to this today? >> no, i think joe would agree with me. they had no answers to what the president was doing, what the secretary of defense was doing.

they weren't there with them. it was a very disappointing in that regard. again, also, going back to one thing you said about who briefed susan rice, they didn't know. they didn't know who gave her the talking points and who changed the talking points. >> sean: can you please clarify, were there two tapes? were there tapes from inside the compound as well, security tapes that were available and the drone tapes? and there were reports early on that there might have been audio, essential there was audio heard because they did fly in from tripoli, a group of people because they knew there was a distress going on. what do we have in terms of the tapes? >> well, the video from inside the compound didn't return to the united states for analysis until several weeks after the incident of so there was no live video from the compound that was available on the night of the incident. the only video that was available was that from the uav,

that was sent over to fly over the compound. >> sean: okay. fundamentally, what i would like to know, congressman king, if the state department knew this was an attack, the intelligence committee prepared statements and they said this was al qaeda related. five days later, susan rice is telling the american people something that is factually inaccurate and two weeks later at u.n., and answering questions in two separate media interviews, when the president's asked, he is referring to the youtube video. how is that possible? >> it is not. to me, it cannot be justified. it cannot be plained because the intelligence community's own analises, we saw the memos today, they said that al qaeda-affiliated groups were directly involved in these attacks. there is no way this can be explained. in fact, certainly on the videos there is no sign of any demonstration, there was no demitration. you know, they say the different

reports coming in, always, there is always a fog of war. but the preponderance of the evidence from the start was this this was clearly a terrorist-directed attack. but general petraeus briefed us and discounted that and said it was not a terrorist attack. there may have been terrorists in the crowd, but there are terrorists everywhere in libya. >> sean: but he was not under oath. he said today he wanted to clarify those remarks? >> well, if he does, i wish he would. but if he does, why did he give us such a wrong report on september 14, because based on the documentation we saw today, he had the information available to him, showing him it was a very heavily involved terrorist attack. >> sean: this is very important. you are saying there is no possible way that two weeks later, the president could not have known this is a terror attack. that's my interpretation. you can ask joe. i don't know how any logical

person could have made that conclusion. >> sean: joe? >> it was certainly clear in the initial reporting from the intelligence community that there was a deliberate terrorist attack that seemed to be watered down over the next couple of weeks and they came back 180 degrees to where they were initially that this was a deliberate terrorist attack. >> sean: the intelligence prepared the talking points, susan rice said from the intelligence community and barack obama said she got it from the intelligence community. and the intelligence community had it was likely al qaeda, but it got watered down. we don't know who watered it down. but really what you are saying is that probably the president of the united states... lied. >> well, again, i don't want to go to that step, yet. it is clear that somebody in the white house had to change the talking points. because the intelligence community said they sent it out with a clear reference to al qaeda. when it came back--

what i meant, two weeks later, he had to have known. when he was -- >> i -- i would certainly think so, unless he was in a time warp. i can't explain t. that's why i found his news conference yesterday so infuriating. it is impossible to accept that phony macho stature. he is defending susan rice. one thing he said may have been true. he said don't go after susan rice, go after him. i think we should go after him because he's the one who knows? >> do you agree with that assessment that he would have had to have known two weeks later? >> i agree. i think that the only person who can answer that question is the president. we need to know what he scbiew when he knew it as far as how the incident evolved. we owe it to the public approximate to the family who is have suffered the loss. >> sean: president obama got testy, trying to defend ambassador rice. many analysts say are saying that the only reason the

republicans were questioning her commentings was because of her gender. james clyburn took it one step further, injecting her race into the equation. watch this. >> i have a real, real problem with my senior senator trying to make her a scapegoat in this. >> why is this hostility to this young public servant, who isn't really -- isn't really a politician, she serves in the foreign affairs capacity. she is not in the arena with you. why are they treating her like someone to punch. >> this young, african-american woman, i must say. >> okay. >> this is the kind of stuff that happened to colin powell. >> sean: liberals are completely missing the point. joining me with reaction, radio talk show host, author of "dear father, dear son," larry elders and jennifer stephano. that was pretty blockbuster. >> it's pretty disappointing. the logical extension is let's only send out white males

because they can't be attacked for gender or race. president obam ain the debate was adamant that called this a terror attack from day 1. if that is true, why does susan rice go out three days later or petraeus go out 3 days later and rice go out 5 days later. candy crowley rescued him -- i said it was a terror attack from day 1. >> sean: why did she say it five days later? >> exactly! >> sean: jennifer, this seems to be an extension, anybody who is talking about this is shallow, ill-informed and political. if they want to say this is a war on women -- they are in campaign mode. fair analysis? >> this is the dying embers of feminism, that this is young put-upon woman. this is an ambassador to the u.n. either she is qualified to be there or she is not f. she is not qualified, fine. take her out. i think it is totally degrading

to women and undercuts us all. >> sean: i don't want to get too lost in that. we heard from two congressmen in the room. a few things we learned. we corroborated, there were two tapes, one got there later, one tape in realtime. and the second thing that they are saying is that the intelligence community, which the white house and the president yesterday said, department mention al qaeda or terror. in fact, did. >> the station cia station chief on the ground immediately called it a terror attack, related to al qaeda. >> sean: so did the libyan president. >> the political season, this is the narrative, the obama administration was pushing. we have al qaeda on the run. we joined with the british and the french bombing libbia, got rid of qaddafi. libya is a friend. obam had to kill this. he is a hands-on commander in chief. that was his narrative in the election, benghazi blew that. that's why this evolved. whether it was a coverup or the

fog of intelligence -- whether it was intentional, we will find out. >> sean: two weeks later tdoesn't seem plausible. >> it doesn't seem possible. this is exactly the obama administration, instead of taking responsibility and stepping forward, it's divert and defend. he keeps putting it back on the intelligence community. he is the president of the united states. he sent an ambassador out there, the u.n. ambassador to say it was because of a video. the job of that ambassador and the president to is to uphold and defend the constitution of the united states, including free speech. he should have never blamed it on the video. the idea they don't know who took out the talking points-- they want as a distraction, the general petraeus affair issue. now, we do know the reports that are certain documents that she shouldn't have were -- that she had available to herself and she gave gives the speech in october, saying, well, everybody knows that they were holding militia. this came up in the hearing today. they are saying that that is

totally false. but maybe in light of everything that has not turned out to be true, do we need to get an answer to that? >> i think so. a question that should have been answered yesterday, general petraeus testified with the narrative, was he testifying, buying the line of the white house because he was under investigation in the fbi and his fate was in the white house hand? that question was not asked. >> i think one thing we need to remember here, this is know about an affair or a salacious story. this is four men who are dead, four more thans are dead and the united states government, under president obama did not address the issue, did not send help when this was asked. i think it is very concerning that after an election, all of this information comes out and we do need the questions answer. good luck getting it from an administration that is the least transparent administration in modern american history. >> sean: there are a coup of things with general petraeus who will testify tomorrow behind closed doors. general petraeus wants to

clarify some things. and in the washington post, i believe, petraeus was at odds with his bosses, prior to this because he felt that the intelligence community was being portrayed in an unfavorable light and he wanted to correct that record. apparently, there was conflict there. now, he also knows that the administration knew about the affair, but then the president's saying, i didn't know until two days after the election. but eric holier knew all summer -- >> meanwhile, obam's meeting with petraeus every day as the head of the cia, while petraeus is under investigation for having been possibly compromised. for some reason, eric holder does not tell the president -- [overlapping dialogue] >> sean: are you kidding me?! >> this is a president that sits down with the cabinet, he is not in control of his own government. if there is some information that could be used against the director of the cia to extract information to help foreign national, the president should have been the first person to

know. there is a lie or a coverup here. >> sean: we have four dead american, the first ambassador killed in 30 years. two navy seals killed and another american. >> in a fire fight that took seven hour, maybe they might have been able to be helped? >> we still don't know. did they request help? are there tapes available of that? this is just the beginning of the investigative process. the question, though, that i have is, what would their possible motive be for lying about this? i have some ideas. >> i think i touched on it earlier. the narrative is we have al qaeda on the run. i, obama, brought a better situation to the middle-east than that cowboy george w. bush and benghazi blows that up. this is during an election. it makes the administration look incompetent, if not deceit elf. >> obama was trying to win the women vote. he felt that women don't like war. that's why romney pulled back on the libya question, i believe. i think he did it for political show. i have a real problem believing

that a sitting president did not know that the head of cia was embroiled in an affair that could have compromised national security. if the president didn't know, he was out of control of his any of the. he still seems out of control of fist government. there was a level of incompetence or a massive coverup. >> he was passive on the issue of whether or not he should have been notified. well, i'll look at it. aren't you upset that you weren't, mr. president? apparently not. >> sean: on the petraeus front and on this issue that if he, the white house sent out susan rice and she had a story that was false five days later and he's advancing a false narrative, two weeks later, i would be pretty angry. he seemed angrier at the attacks on susan rice. i have to run. coming up, we have laid out the time line, compared the stories from all the major players and asked the necessary questions. but perhaps the question with the most consequence, what if the president lied about benghazi? and what if in fact, he knew about this much earlier?

you just heard congressman king and heck say there is no way that the president didn't know two weeks later that this was a terror attack. and he kept blaming a youtube video. we will check in with david limbaugh and peter johnson jr., and look at ramifications. next. it's the cleanest, clearest water. we fd the best, sweetest crab for red lobster that we can find. [ male announr ] hurry in to rd lobster's crabfest! the only time of year you can savor 5 succulent crab entrees, all under 20 dollars. like a half-pound tender snow crab paired with savory grilled shrimp, st 12.99. or our hearty crab and roasted garlic seafood bake. [ forsythe ] if i wouldn't pt on my table at home, i wouldn't bring it in. my name's jon forsythe, and i seaood differently.

we have so much tenology in our store toeally show the customers what's going on with their bodies. now you can feel what happens as we raise your sleep number setting and allow the bed to contour to your individual shape. oh, wow. that feels really good.

during our semi-annual sleep sale, save $500 on our classic series special edition bed set. plus special financing on selected beds final days. sale ends sunday. exclusively at a sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699.

>> sean: as we continue to break down the benghazi investigation, the most important question still lingers, did our commander in chief, lie to you, the american people? based on what congressmen heck and king said in the previous segment, that he had to have known. so what are the consequences, if in fact, he did lie to you? here to explain, the author of "the great destroyer," and legal analyst, peter johnson jr. what if he lied? >> eventually, he would be impeached and there would be a trial for impeachment and we would make a determination about a conviction. we are not there yet. >> sean: no, i agree itch but there appears to be a pattern of decept dwron -- deception. there appears to be an effort not to release informs-- two months out itch that was a brilliant interview with congressman king and congressman heck that, the president had an

awareness at 5:00 p.m. on september 11. from what i understand, the videotape, the drone tape the cctv surveillance tape is compelling and disturbing. to see the ambassador's body being dragged out must be been a terrible, terrible thing to say. >> sean: that was an hour and 18 minutes after the incident began, the president knew about t. didn't know what was happening. is it plausible -- it wasn't the congressman king or heck -- is it plausible that the president didn't know too would have gones later? >> if that's true, he is the most incompetent, disengaged, chief executive we have ever had. they spun this narrative consciously. they sent susan rice on five shows to make three points, that they had substantial security, that there was no breakdown in security in benghazi. they had taken care of our own people. that this was not the result of a terror attack and third, that

it was the result of a video. all three of those things have been conclusively shown lies. and obama has the audacity to be outraged to be questioned about it and gets up in mccain's and graham's face and dares them to go after him and portrays susan rice as a victim, when of course, she might be his victim! but she's not the victim of senator mccain and graham. he was either duped by obama, or she lied herself. >> sean: peter, let's go back to the night of the second debate. >> yeah, the president said, i said it was terror in the rose garden. five days later, susan rice is saying it was not. two weeks later, he's saying it is not. >> there is a generic reference to teror and disparate stories therefore. i think we know from congressman king's interview with you, he was talking about an altered -- an altered -- talking point. he said the intelligence people put forward that the -- that an al qaeda-affiliated organization

was involved in the attack. somehow, as it got to susan rice's presentation on five talk shows -- she won't talk to fox news, she ignored her crew in the airport. they haven't responded to fox news. it changed. why! >> sean: david. last word? >> well, they definitely want to portray this as not being connected to al qaeda because obam's foreign policy credentials were burnished by proving in his view, that he had al qaeda back on its heels and that his foreign policy was be nice to the terrorist, it's as a result of poverty. that's the only reason we have terrorism. if we are nice, we won't have terrorism t. manifestly failed. that's the narrative. >> sean: stay there. we will come back and continue with david limbaugh and peter johnson jr., this may be the next defense secretary. before he gets the nomination, we want to remind you, the mesh people, about the real john

kerry. we investigate. you don't want to miss it, straight ahead. me, you know it can be hard to breathe, and how that feels. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open for 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. spiriva handihaler tiotropium bromide inhalation powder does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd spiriva helps me breathe better.

(blowing sou) ask your doctor about spiriva. i'm thinking about upgrading... finally! jonathan was fine when you were in your 20s, but he's not right for you. good-bye jonathan and his creepy little girl hands. i meant... [ male announcer ] or choosing a windows 8 device with help from the experts at staples. another way staples and hp make it easier to upgrade. make your windows 8 experience even better with hp. and this week, get $200 off the hp envy dv6 notebook. staples. that was easy.

>> sean: we continue now with david limbaugh and peter johnson jr. all right. this is one of those moments where have you to stand back here. the liberals are playing politics. the president played politics yesterday -- go after susan rice, all of this indignation and outrage. this shouldn't be partisan. we have four dead americans. >> you're right. thises should be a bipartisan, nonpolitical opportunity and let's see how we can get some transparency in this government and find out why these people died and how did we respond if at all, and why didn't we respond isn't president should be on the air tomorrow and give an hour-speech and bring the secretary of defense and bring in the secretary of state, put them on a panel and say, okay,

what happened here, here, here? we are explaining it to the american people, right here and now. and that tend ends all of this nonsense about race and sex and what someone said about susan rice and what she knew and that's all nonsense-- before the election, but now it's after the election -- >> the politics should go by the boards. if the democrats don't step up in a bipartisan way with the republicans and try to get to the bottom, they are politicizing it. >> sean: let me continue on the path and ask about the politicizing of this. this has been reduced to a war on women because susan rice is a women and jamesibly burn turning this into the race card. it sounds like a continuation of the campaign we just finished? >> everything was political with this administration, sean. petraeus resigns three days after the election and six days before he's scheduled to testify. you can't tell me that wasn't orchestrated, obama feigns

outrage, representing susan rice as an expert. he said he didn't know anything about fast & furious. he said he didn't know anything about benghazi, being a terrorist attack. he said he didn't know anything about petraeus. he cannot possibly not know! he said he wasn't informed about petraeus, yet the fbi was investigating, he said he can't answer questions about whether he was informed because an investigation's going on. well, whether an investigation's going on doesn't keep him from admiding what he knows about whether he was informed. cya for obama. >> sean: look, there is a legal definition, you are both attorneys. there is a legal definition of lying under oath and there is a penalty for that. >> yeah. >> sean: but if somebody lies for political reasons to the american people, do they just lose -- >> perjury is perjury. high crimes are high crimes, misdemeanors are misdemeanors. we are not at that point, yet. >> sean: i agree. >> we are at the point of full

disclosure, at this point. i am not the president. i don't aspire to the president, nor do you. but if i am the president, my inclination is to say, listen, i found out about this at 5:00. i directed the secretary of state to do this. i directed the secretary of defense to do that. >> sean: there is one problem. he flew to vegas. >> that is a problem. that's why we are not getting the straight story yet. >> sean: thank you both. david, good to see you. don't go anywhere. when we come back, we take a look at the media mash, next. we will check in with brent bozel. but john kerry is rumored to be next in line to head up the state department. but we will take a trip down memory lane and remind americans of why wherejohn kerry is and where he stands in relation to military matters, coming up. well, if it isn't mr. margin.

mr. margin? don't be modest, bob. you found a better way to pack a bowling ball. that was ups. and who called ups? you did, bob. i just asked a question. it takes a long time to pack a bowling ball. the last guy pitched more ball packers. but you... you consulted ups. you fod a better way. that's logistics. that's margin. find out what else ups knows. i'll do that. you're on a roll. that's funny. i wasn't being funny, bob. i know.

marie callender's turkey breast with stuffing is a great reason to slow down. creamy mash potatoes, homestyle gravy and 320 calories. marie callender's. it's time to savor. >> there is no reason that young american soldiers need to go into the homes of iraqis, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women... >> sean: that was senator john kerry, rumored to be a candidate for defense secretary, trash-talking our troops in 2005. but that wasn't the 50 time he has done that. listen to what he said in 1971, testifying before the senate foreign relations committee about the vietnam war. >> they relive the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do. they told the stories of times

that they had personally raped, cut off the ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, raise -- razed villages in a fashion, reminiscent of genghis kahn, shot dogs and life stoke for fun and generally ravaged the countryside of south vietnam, in addition to the normal ravage of war. >> sean: joining me with reaction, the co-founder of the swiftboat veterans for truth, john o'neill. thanks for being with us. >> thank you. thap thank you, sean. >> sean: go ahead? >> sean, the -- you know, the kerry quote is typical of kerry, he was quoting people, many of whom were proved never to have

been in vietnam or in the military. we lost 58,000 people in vietnam. i knew a fair number of them. a love them from my class at the naval academy. to describe them as the army of gang -- genghis khan is typical of his career n. 1972, kerry wrote a book, call "the new soldier" that starts with a caricature of the manners on iwo jima, raising the flag, describing what kerry hopes the military will be. it's a frightening pictured. remember 2006 when, you be, -- you know, he said, if you didn't study hard you would end up stuck in iraq, right when our troops were fighting. it was a hawk in iraq and a surrender guy at the end, as he has been over and over again. he would be much better at hauling a white flag than a

secretary of defense, anywhere. >> sean: it's amazing in 2005, after he had been through all of this, was accusing our troops of going into the hopes of iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing children and kids and women -- let me ask thu-- if in fact barack obama wants to nominate him for secretary of defense or state, will the swiftboat vets for truth come back? >> we will do the very best we can. i was contacted today, i spoke today with three people that won the congressional medal of honor, who will do the very best we can. heck, i mean, woo we have hundreds of thousands of kid who is have engagedin compat bat, in the armed forces, can you imagine them counting on john kerry to protect their back-- i know with the left, they give and you your fellow veteran it's by the way, war here oh people who served their country honorably that, challenged lies he told about other vietnam

vets, they use it as a pejorative. but this ad that you guys ran was very effective. >> they served their country with courage and distinction. they're the men who served with john ker nevietnam. they're his entire chain of command. most of the officers in kerry's unit, even the gunner from his own boat and the men who spent years in north vietnamese prison camps, tortured for refusing to confess what john kerry accused them of, being war criminals. they were also decorated, many very highly. but they kept their medalsful today, they are teachers, farmers, businessmen, ministers and community leaders. and of course, fathers and grandfathers. with nothing to gain for themselves, except the satisfaction that comes with telling the truth, they have come forward to talk about the john kerry they know because to them, honesty and character

still matter, especially in a time of war. snoop pretty powerful. so you would do this again? >> can i tellue let me tell you the story about the ad. we decided to make the ad n. houston, a fella who had been a prisoner of war, air force academy graduate, a prisoner of war for 8 years of the north vietnamese. he was dying of pan creatic cancer. he called me and said, why didn't you call me to be this in ad? we said, we knew you were really, really sick. he flew himself at his own expense, up there, was in the ad, he die aid month later. that's how strongly all of us felt, what he defense unbelievable, in '71, '72. it was unbelievable what he did to our own troops in the war in iraq, to make him it is secretary of defense or the secretary of state would be a disaster for our national security. it really would be a total

forfeiture of the loyalty that we owe the troops in the field. >> sean: we will continue to follow the story. i know the left is having a collective meltdown at this moment. too bad they don't like to hear john kerries in his own words, it's a stark reminder for the american people. thank you for being with us. coming up, brent bozel with this week's media mash. and today's jobless claims bring more sad news,s obama economy and what you could look forward to the next four years. obama's former economic adviser will attempt to defend this pathetic record, coming up. having you ship my gifts couldn't be easier. well, having a ton of locations doesn't hurt. and my daughter loves the santa. oh, ah sir. that is a customer. let's not tell mom. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. fedex office.

a hybrid? most are just no fun to drive. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. now, here's one that will make you feel alive. meet the five-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max says ha. c-max says wheeee. which is what you get, don't you see? cause c-max has lots more horsepower than prius v, a hybrid that c-max also bests in mpg. say hi to the all-new 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid.

>> sean: back to "hannity" time for another edition of media mash, our weekly roundup of all the ways the mainstream media tries to put their liberal spin on the news. if you think they were in the bag for the anointed one before the election, well, let me tell you -- nothing has changed. joining me now, brent bozel, brother bozel, how are you? >> brother hannity, how are we doing? all right. well, chris matthews has a new dog whistle. everything to him is code, racist, dog whistle. the new word is urban. we are going to play that first and sort of like all the words

we have to add to the chris matthews dictionary that don't put a thrill up his leg. >> up next, with the paul ryan mean when he blamed barack obama's victory on the urban vote. do you like that word? is heblying that dog whistle again? there is more of this dog whistle crap. here's paul ryan expressing his surprise at the pro-obama turnout in an interview, monday, two days ago, well after the election. let's listen to ryan. >> i think the surprise was some of the turnout. some of the tushout, especially in urban area, which definitely gave president obam at big margin. >> he is talking about getting rid of the work requirement as dishonest. you are playing that ethnic card there. you keep saying chicago, by the way, you noticed that is a defensive message. he is helping poor people in the bad neighborhoods. >> there is a lot of black people in chicago. >> a dogle is a dog whistle,

clarence. chuck and jive has a particularly ethnic connecticutoitation. but to throw it at the president is blatant. >> sean: dog whistle, urbarks chicago. he has had people on his program that the liberal says urban, it's okay. if the liberal says shuck and jive, it's okay, only conservatives can't say it. >> when liberals say it's okay, it's because it's okay. i am talking to you from lexus alexandria. i don't know what the heck he is talking b. i am going to give him some words, how about intolerance? how about black-listing? how about big brother? how about censorship? this is what's taking place. the radicals on the left are telling conservatives-- >> you can't talk like a conservative. >> sean: how about this is a political tactic to silence opposition?

and to advance a false line narrative that if you are conservative, you are racist. but how that? >> sure. sure. if you oppose -- especially if you oppose a black man like barack obama, have you to be a racist. >> sean: can't be his policies. let's go to his press conference yesterday. well, some people eye mean, this is almost like -- just it was almost like chris, let's put it that way. >> chris, you first? >> okay. >> thank you, mr. president. and congratulations, by the way. >> thanks. >> one quick -- >> when i was running for state senate -- >> that's right. i was. >> we go back aways. >> i have never seen you lose. i wasn't looking that one time. >> there you go. >> isn't that nice? a tender moment, thrill up her leg. thrill up chris's leg. >> you know what gets me about that, sean, it is not this quote/unquote journalist in the front row, who is playing, she

might as well be exaifnling spit with the president while she is doing this, it is everyone in that room. this is the -- the blue-chip ensemble of journalists in america. no one, but nobody seemed the least bit perterbed that she and he are playing kissy face in a press conference. nobody was at all-- kissy face? >> what does that tell you about our press corps. >> sean: all right. brent bozel, good to see you itch thank you, sean? >> the long job fair lines, the brand-new jobless claims meaner they're only going to get longer. trying to defend the latest round of horrible, rotten, bad economic news, next. ♪

[ male announcer ] it's that time of year again. medicare open enrollment. time to compare plans and costs. you don't have to make changes. but it never hurts to see if you can find better coverage, save money, or both. and check out the preventive benefits you get after the health care law. ♪ open enrollment ends dember 7th. so now's the time. visit care.gov or call 1-800-medicare. >> sean: it's nine days into president obama's re-election and now the number of americans

filing for unemployment jumped 78,000 to 4 39 ,000, the highest in a year and-a-half. some may blame hurricane sandy, but the sharpest increase came from two of the most crucial victory states -- ohio and pennsylvania. coincidence? joining us is austin giewldzby. you know, you are a nice guy. >> 260, that's how many hours you have been in default on the steak dinner you owe me because of the president's re-election. >> sean: you are a numbers guy because of the obama deficit. >> this unemployment number -- you say some people attribute this to hurricane sandy -- everyone does. >> sean: in ohio? in pennsylvania! >> what did you say the week before when the number came out and it was down quite significantly. >> sean: listen, i thought -- here's the bottom line. if we had the job participation

rate that we had in when the president took office, you know, you are a smart guy, the real unemployment is 11.7% -- >> be careful. the population has aged, so you would expect it to be down some. the labor force participation's the weakest part of the job market of the the strongest part is that in the last two, two and-a-half years, we added more than five million jobs. >> sean: how can you say that when all of these people are unemployed -- >> all i said is that's the strongest part. we are struggling -- but we are definitely making progress. >> sean: no net new jobs. >> from the recession, you are right. that's the worst recession in 75 years-- excuse me -- >> are you blaming the president for the recession. >> sean: can i get -- [overlapping dialogue] >> it started before he was there. >> sean: will you write down a date when you will stop blaming bush. >> you said bush. >> sean: you say "i inherited --." >> i am going to write down. i am going to write it down.

they, the nbr, dates the end of the recession in the mid-summer. but -- i am writing it down right here. you keep this. you keep this. i am going to sign it fur, too. look, you got my signature on there. >> sean: great. i still have to buy you a steak dinner. i lost the bet. >> i don't want a white castle burger. >> sean: i lost the bet. rub it in. gloat. >> have you to take me. you are not sending flee -- what are you talkingd about-- i have to sit through dinner with you? >> yes! >> sean: listen, here's the point. we now have record debt and deficit. the president wants to raise taxes. the economy is slower now than it was in 2010, when he extended -- >> the unemployment rate is 2 points lower than it was their then. >> sean: but you don't count the people -- they are not counted if they run out of benefits. >> hold on. they are not counted -- if you take the broader measure, which visaid and written publicly, we

shouldn't just take the unemployment readirate because that doesn't reflect all the problems. but if you take the broad measure, which is still in the 14%, that thing was almost 18%. it was almost 15% when the president took office. so you can't try to compare two different numbers. that has improved quite a lot-- we play with the numbers -- >> we should count 'em. >> sean: we have 50 million americans on food stamps. 50. just came out. and the cbo's projecting in 2013, the unemployment number's going to go up to 9.3%, if we get a -- >> no, if we go off the fiscal cliff. >> sean: i'm sorry. 9.3% approximate goes high fer there is no deal. >> look, we should -- you can't have it both ways-- i don't want -- >> if we want to address the deficit, which we should, i think we have stodo that with

cuts and new revenues. the share of -- [overlapping dialogue] >> revenue last year went up 6.4%. >> we are coming out of the worst recession of our lifetime. >> sean: will you write down when you are going to stop whining -- >> i am not whining! >> sean: write it down. when will you stop blame ago when does he take responsibility. >> he is not blaming anything about what he inherited. we have added more than five million jobs? >> how many have you lost? you lost more! >> no! >> sean: have you fewer americans working. >> look, if you look at the first term of george bush -- you brought up george bush. >> sean: [overlapping dialogue] >> those policies generated fewer jobs than barack obama has generated-- all right. what are your obama friends tell ow this program? they hate it. >> the